The amount of information available on an individual computer or network is often overwhelming. The information available on the Internet is simply astronomical. The information comprises data such as text, audio, and video. Increasingly, information such as telephone calls and video conferences are being recorded and archived alongside all the other information.
In a library, books are shelved by subject. Astronomy books are on the shelf together, young adult novels have their own section, etc. What do libraries do with young adult novels that take place in space? Librarians had to pick a section in the library and place the one book there or purchase multiple books.
Digital information is different. Because there are no physical shelves, the same information can be categorized in multiple ways. There are no limits on the number of labels placed on information. This means that a single piece of information, such as a video, may have any number of “tags.”
For the purpose of this specification, the term “tag” is defined as a non-hierarchical keyword or term assigned to a piece of information, for example and without limitation, a digital file, an internet bookmark, digital image, video, etc.
Information may be tagged in various ways. These ways include, for example and without limitation, users may assign tags, the creator(s) of the information may tag the information upon creation, tags may be assigned by a system automatically as a result of the users participating in a conference, based on word spotting, based on the time the information is produced or accessed, past user activity, etc.
Tags are useful for quickly and easily labeling information so that it can be recalled without having to worry about folder hierarchy. Because there is no limit on the number of tags, information can be labeled anything. For example, in FIG. 2, image 201-1 has the tags: Sailing, Partly Cloudy, Ocean, Summer, Rowing, and Outdoors. (In listing 202-1). The user or users “tagging” image 201-1, may associate one or more of these tags with that image. One user tags the image with “sailing” because there is a sailboat, another user tags the image with the “summer” because they perceive the image to be a summer scene, and so on.
However, one user tagged image 201-1 with the tag “rowing.” It would not be accurate to describe image 201-1 as a rowing scene. If someone were to access information based on the tag “rowing,” image 201-1 would show up. The problem is: How to determine the appropriateness of tags.
In the prior art, one way this was done was by limiting who can tag information. In some instances, only the user who created the information could add tags to it. In other instances, only the user who uploaded the information onto a server could add tags. Often users may provide only one perspective to the information, which may be limiting the scope of the information. In other instances users provide incorrect or dishonest tags to the information.
Sometimes the job of creating tags was given to moderators who would have to look through the information and then add tags. This creates the issue of how to determine which users have the expertise to properly tag information.
These methods also have the problem of limiting collaboration. Collaboration is desirable because certain individuals may add relevant tags that creators, uploaders, and moderators may miss. For example, an American user might tag image 201-2 as “football,” but to many, image 201-2 is more accurately described as “American football.” A collaborative approach may be necessary to get both tags.